ArticlePublic health nutrition2026
Potential cost-effectiveness of outdoor unhealthy food and drink advertising restrictions in Western Australia.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo model the potential value for money of implementing proposed unhealthy food advertising restrictions on Western Australian (WA) transport-owned assets to prevent obesity-related diseases.
designA cost-benefit analysis using a societal perspective was undertaken to model the policy intervention over a 30-year time horizon. The effectiveness of the intervention was based on a similar policy implemented in the United Kingdom by Transport for London, adapted to the WA context. The ACE-Obesity Policy model, a validated multi-state lifetable Markov model, was used to assess the expected health (quantified as health-adjusted life years (HALY)) and economic outcomes of the intervention's impact on unhealthy food consumption. The potential costs of policy development and monitoring and revenue impacts on government and industry (outdoor advertising companies) were included in the modelled analysis.
settingWestern Australia.
participantsGreater Perth population.
resultsThe cost of implementing the policy was estimated at A$28 million (95 % uncertainty intervals (UI): $23, $35), 71 % borne by the government and the remaining by outdoor advertisers. A mean population weight reduction of 0·58 kg (95 % UI: 0·28, 0·90) was estimated, which translated to 5906 health-adjusted life years gained (95 % UI: 2750, 9084) with a monetary value of A$1374 million (95 % UI: $642, $2112). Eight percent of the monetised benefits were attributed to healthcare cost savings, while 92 % were associated with monetised health gains. The intervention was estimated to generate a net-present value of $1346 million (95 % UI: $614, $2082) and benefit-cost ratio of 50 (95 % UI: 23, 81).
conclusionPolicy to restrict advertising of unhealthy foods on WA transport-owned assets is likely to represent excellent value for money.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.